Comments by "cchris874" (@cchris874) on "Judge sentences the 3 men convicted of murdering Ahmaud Arbery" video.

It's irrelevant. The Ms were in the wrong either way.
2
That said, the punishment was excessive if you go by standards of due process, and proportionality. Especially for William Bryan, whose sentence is almost as much of an outrage as his contribution to the crime. I would agree to wave this opinion if you and others would concede that felony murder laws are barbaric anachronisms having no place in a civilized justice system. They have done far more to harm black people than did these men, as sickening as they are. THAT would be real justice.
2
Well I don't think that's how it worked. They are guilty of manslaughter because there's absolutely no proof of intent to kill. Travis shot as a reflexive reaction tosuddenly being attacked. How can you not see that? Travis should get the appropriate sentence for creating reckless endangerment that created a dangerous situation. But intent to kill cannot be proven. The judge thinks he's a mind reader. WRONG.
1
@mdjb49 "When he brought and then targeted and aimed his gun at an unarmed man who Travis admitted never threatened physically or verbally any of these three me, he demonstrated intent to kill." Not beyond reasonable doubt. Cannot be proven, though I concede it may well have been the case. "Your murderous hero" Why would I want manslaughter for "my hero"? Shows you are stereotyping anyone who differs with you on the degree of punishment. You cast them all into the same lot. That's not intelligent thinking.
1
@yampy1353 Impossible to know that. In the trial, the medical examiner testified the gun was easily within reach of Arbery when the first shot was fired. The video shows that Travis shot Arbery AFTER he turned to his left and lunged at Travis. So how can anyone know what was going on in Travis' mind when he pulled the trigger? It may have been an understandable reflex reaction to defend yourself. This is what's known as reasonable doubt in my book.
1
Ultimately though, the judgement was flawed. The jury are not mind readers, but decided to bestow this ability on to themselves regardless . Reasonable doubt was thus amputated.
1
Well I don't disagree he was being aggressively persued by some racist scumbags. But he could have just continued running, or run through the adjacent yard, and not attacked them. This is no excuse for the Ms, but if you're implying they would have shot him dead regardless, that's unprovable.
1
@weytogoman There's no doubt in my mind Travis lied big time in court. However, I believe there's reasonable doubt as to Malice Murder.
1
@weytogoman I may not be quite as intune to all the details in the last few seconds as you. So I'm happy to be corrected if I left out something relevant. Yes, indeed, I'm well aware that enhanced FBI video and Travis' own words in court prove that Travis aimed the gun at Arbery some 5-10 seconds or more out. That's armed assault with a dangerous weapon. But in itself it doesn't prove beyond reasonable doubt an intent to shoot. If it did, why didn't he pull the trigger right then and there, or during all of those seconds as Arbery approached? = reasonable doubt. Or, if you think he waited to avoid hitting Bryan, he may just wanted to continue to scare and bully Arbery, = reasonable doubt. One way or another, this is not a viable proof. Travis changing position- this is where I concede I might be off. But my reasoning is that changing a position might be due to the belief Arbery might be armed, so he wants to get into a more defensive position. There's only so much one can tell from the video. Arbery charges - even if you are guilty of reckless conduct and armed assault, when someone turns and charges at you, and (quite possibly) tries to grab your gun, there might also be a reflex reaction to shoot. It might be a self preservation instinct to shoot when someone tries to grab your gun, since they could grab it and shoot you. If you want to convince me we know for a virtual certainty that Travis' shot was totally unrelated to a reflex action of self defense, please fill in any blanks I am missing.
1
@weytogoman I didn't have time to watch everything needless to say, but I watched most the excerpts you cite. Three statements that stand out to me are Arbery "Turns and decides to engage Travis McMichael" at 37:30 Travis "could tell from 30-40 yards away Arbery was going to fight." 3:13:30 Travis: "He said he was afraid Mr. Arbery would get hold of the shot gun. 3:15:55 On that basis, I don't see the issue of reasonable doubt is resolved.
1
@weytogoman And now let's state the obvious, as everyone seems to have a massive case of amnesia in this case. As a general rule, if someone tries to attack you and you are armed, you might fear for your life. And it would be understandable that you might shoot in self-defense. Whether legally or not is besides the point. Are you in disagreement with this common sense assessment?
1
@weytogoman OK, well let's go more in depth. 2:30 in your link there's a discussion of self defense. There is no resolution of Travis' claim to self defense. The argument that he wasn't sure if Arbery struck him leaves that point unresolved. What you seem to have missed is again obvious. Even if you have not been struck, and your gun has not been grabbed, when someone turns and decides to confront you in a threatening way, you might shoot out of fear. Have you not seen the many instances of police being confronted by an unarmed man and they shoot? Whether justified or not, the motive is fear, not malice. Isn't this obvious?
1
@weytogoman Sorry, you don't have the intelligence or grasp of basic concepts to continue the discussion. Feel free to have the final word.
1